No compromise? Zeiss blogs about its new lens line and the 55mm F1.4

Zeiss has posted a blog article that talks about the inception and development of its latest line of lenses, led by the 55mm F1.4 that was first shown at Photokina last year. Titled 'No Compromise', it explains how the company is aiming to meet the demands of the latest high resolution sensors, to satisfy the needs of both professional photographers and ambitious hobbyists.

The development of the 55mm F1.4 is discussed by leading members of the team involved, the product managers Nicole Balle, Dr. Michael Pollmann and Christophe Casenave. The ambitious goal was simply to create the best lens on the market, able to realize the full potential of cameras like the 36MP Nikon D800. After interviews with potential customers, the team decided to focus on lenses for portraits, landscapes and still lifes - applications for which the company's manual focus lenses are best suited.

Dr. Pollmann talks about the evaluation of the first prototypes as a key moment of truth; would the lens's predicted performance be visible in actual use? The answer, apparently, was yes: "After we had the first results from the prototypes, even the skeptics were surprised at how clearly the higher image quality becomes visible in the pictures." One compromise that does seem to have been made, though, is size - the 55mm F1.4 is a monster due to to its complex optical system.

This picture of the 55mm F1.4 on a Nikon pro body shows the sheer size of the new lens

The final phase of the project was about bringing the lens to production and sale. Even the packaging was carefully designed: according to Casanave "Such a product is not just unpacked. We want the “unboxing experience” to be something that is really special and representative about this unique product."

The 55mm F1.4 will come onto the market towards the end of this year, and Zeiss is confident it will be one of the best lenses on the market. Says Casanave "There will be nothing of comparable quality, and that not only applies to this specific focal length range". It'll be interesting to see whether users agree.

Nice lens. What are we supposed to put it on?Real photographers need REAL VIEWFINDERS.Selling off my a900 and Zeiss lenses. Sony and Zeiss told me they don't want my money and that, like it or not, I would have to go buy Nikon.

I've tried handling one of the Touit lenses - that smooth focussing ring is AWFUL and feels cheap. Hopefully this will feel better made - but can you imagine trying to focus the lens in any thing other than ideal circumstances (hot & sweaty or with gloves on)???

Yes this may be the best quality lens on the market. Id prefer a second best lens with autofocus so I can capture that instant image. Focusing manually with no split prisim is slow and you either miss the shot or get it out of focus.

These lenses are getting insanely big. This looks about the size of Nikon's 105 f2 DC; the only 55mm-equivalent lenses this big until now have been those for 6x7 MF cameras and bigger. I guess 135 FX is turning into the new medium format, and indeed it's probably only medium format-style photographers, using a D800E or future even higher resolution bodies, preferably tripod mounted, and printing 30 inches or more, who will see significant benefits. This new Zeiss line combined with the likes of the D800E looks to me like a perfect replacement for a Mamiya/Hasselblad/Phase One system; but superfluous for traditional 135 format photography.

My last 35mm film camera that I kept with me at nearly all times, was a Contax S2 - titanium bodied, 100% mechanical shutter - fitted with a Ziess Planar 50mm f1.4. If I wanted other focal lengths, I'd shoot on my Olympus OM-1 and the assortment of Zuikos I had. Renenber, this Contax was my take-everywhere camera, and I wasn't interested in toting a "system" around day-to-day. The results of shooting Kodachrome 25 through this lens, even wide open, were nothing short of stunning. Even made my prime Zuiko glass look fuzzy by comparison.

Since I went digital about 9 years ago, I've been shooting Olympus with Oly zooms. Good images, nice handling, but nothing to compare to my Zeiss 50/f1.4.

I am about to invest in my next DSLR - and am VERY tempted to forego autofocus and zooms, and instead buy a couple of Zeiss prime lenses. Myt only quibble: Nikon's focusing thread runs back-to-front compared to Olympus & Canon, and I am not sure I could get used to that!

Great to know that you are one of the very few who really appreciate the superb optical quality of Zeiss lenses and that you are willing to forego auto focus and zooms.

Since you are about to invest in a DSLR, I would suggest you go for the full frame Canon 6D or 5D Mk3. The 6D would be cheaper. If you are comfortable with APS-C, the new 70D is an alternative.

You can start off with the 35mm f/2.0 ZE and the 50mm f/2.0 macro ZE on your 6D. Later, you can add the 25mm f/2.0 ZE and the 85mm f/1.4 ZE. In fact, almost all of them are excellent with the exception of the 50mm f1.4 ZE which is soft wide open. Thus, the 50mm f/2.0 macro is much better.

...Yes, you do get more MP, but actually, at high ISO past ISO800 both Canon and Nikon sensors have the same SNR, and although you probably only get 1 stop of headroom at ISO100 with the Canon compared to the rather mind boggling 2.5-3 stops you get with the Nikon (which you'd probably only use for signle shot HDR, and personnally I don't really like pulling the shadows, it does make some fancy scenes, most of the time it's over the top, but it's not any closer to what the eye sees, well that's debatable I suppose), I'd still would not call Canon sensors "Jurassic" artefacts... I mean at high ISO there's less than a third of a stop difference... Nikon has more DR, okay, but don't make it sound like you can't pull out a good size print from a 5DIII or a 6D.

To white shadow: thanks for your encouragement - I definitely want to go full frame, both for depth of field reasons, and to maximise image quality from any new, prime glass I buy.

To Yxa: my current Zeiss Planar is paired with FILM, not a "Jurassic" sensor (unless that's what you call a fine emulsion!). And no, I am not talking about buying a new Zeiss lens for my 9-year-old Olympus E1 - even if they did make the lens with a 4/3rds mount - which they don't!

@ White Shadow it takes one to know oneI have Canon, Olympus , Nikon and Panasonic camerasHow about you?IQ-vice there is not anything that touches a D800 except Medium format or higher and the this Zeiss lens is geard for the highest IQ too

I use Zeiss zf 25/2 , 35/2 and 100/2 with my D800. The results are quite spectacular. and my Nikon F/2.8 zoom lenses are mostly left behind. Zeiss lenses are expensive, but their performance on high resolution cameras is worth the money.

@NervalCanon tries to be on par at high ISOs, but with no luck: those are still better on Nikons (and became much better after downscaling thanks to modern software NR methods that reconstruct image instead of smoothing out noisy details). But look at color separation tab at dxo: nikon is insanely better!

What BS do you feed on? with a name like yabokkie you must be a plattelander or some redneck from the deep karoo, what on earth do you know about lenses and more specifically Zeiss? Shut your cakehole and go catch your sheep.

Having used Zeiss lenses for a while, I must say I am completely satisfied with the optical quality. Even the Canon "L" lenses have difficulty matching them. Just superb. Obviously, if you need a 70-200 zoom lens for shooting catwalk models, then you have no choice but to get the EF 70-200L IS MkII.

Do not fear manual focus. If you are an experience photographer you would have learn that a long time ago and know what to do. If you have not, its never too late too. In many situation like low light, landscape and macro photography, manual focusing may be the preferred choice.

It is good that Zeiss lenses are made to uncompromising professional standards rather than a "consumer friendly price". This is not to say they are super expensive too. In fact, unlike Leica lenses, they are quite affordable.

Try one and you will know why it is so good. Even their UV and polarizing filters are better than others. Same for optical lenses.

Autofocus lens would have to have light, easily movable and relatively few individual lens groups. When doing a no-compromize optical design the lens movement becomes complicated and heavy, too heavy to be moved swiftly by the AF mechanism. So rather than have autofocus which would be slow, they do a no-compromize manual focus, so that there will not be bad press about slow autofocus...

Hey yabokkie! I would happily invite you to come here to Germany and visit with me the Zeiss company. I'm sure your face would fall off if you see what is produced here. And no, there are no Japanese walking around here, like you think. If I see one, I will make a picture and send it to you ;-). And if Zeiss has "no clue" about optics, why are their optics used in allmost all military vehicles in the world like the Leopard 2, Merkava etc, or Satelites, or medical optics?I think the only one who has no clue is you. Truth can be cruel, I know.I know what is good glass on my D800E and D4, it's Zeiss!

In reply to Petka: There is no technical obstruction for making the lens autofocus. The Canon 85mm f/1.2 moves the complete optical system (except the rearmost element) during (auto)focusing, and that is one heavy clump of glass, much heavier than a 55mm f/1.4. Same with the Canon 50mm f/1, also a heavy lens with lots of glass.

Zeiss has decided to omit AF, that is a marketing decision. Makes the system technically much simpler, and they avoid all the hazzle of reverse engineering the AF protocol/interface for each camera brand.

I sure wish Zeiss would at least tell us what FL's they intend to release with the Uber design. Enough with the vague hints, "landscape" etc. I'm very interested in these lenses. Appears to be significantly narrowing the gap with MFDBs at a fraction of the cost.

The last thing a Pro. Photographer needs is an 'unboxing experience' Yes it's def. aimed at the ambitious hobbyist!PS: How about a DPR list of photographer hierarchy so we all know where we stand? I've always considered myself to be a Pro-sumer until this beast came along:(

@yabokkie: No, compared to decent SLR finders like the ones in Minolta SLRs made in the 1970s (XD7) and 1980s (X-700) it clearly isn't. Even with aids like "focus peaking", in many situations you still need to activate a zoom-in feature, too, to be able focus correctly, making manual focus a no-go for everything that needs quick reaction.

You'd be surprised to see how some people manage outdo autofocus both in terms of precision and speed using manual focus with a viewfinder and a good focus screen. It does take a lot of practice I suppose (I'm really not good with it, but I've met a couple of photographers who obtain astounding results, with minimum fuss).Truth is for stills, it's really hard to beat you eye, and only last gen EVF start to be decent. I had a Canon AE1, it had a quite decent focus screen, and with the smooth 50/1.4 you'd hardly miss focus.I find it hard to focus correctly on the fly with EVFs (screens or OVF styled), with a screen under 460K it's almost impossible, and even with 1M dots, the image is clear but depth remain harder to judge than with the naked eye through a good FF VF.

I tried it once at local Zeiss event here and I was truly impressed with its wide open performance.I think it is reasonably priced for what it is , even consider it cheap a bargain.but for me it is just too huge , it is about as big and heavy as my Nikon AF-S24-70mm f2.8GED N lens.I owned the zeiss 135mm f2 APO but I sold it for the Zeiss 50mm f2 MP and Zeiss 18mm f3.5 because I could not tolerate the weight and size of the 135mm APO, I think the 55 f1.4 won't sell well enough to justify this new line(they are just too heavy and awkward to use.

don't mix up Leica with Hassy. Leica is doing very well and designing and producing its own cameras while Hassy is just re-decorating some of Sony RX line cameras.Leica X2 , M240 are both great and if I have to get one camera to keep in my coat pocket , it would have to be the X2(I hope the X3 or whatever called X2 successor will get great video mode, though).

Leica is also doing light cosmetic changes to some Panasonic cameras and doubling the rebranded camera's price with the red dot tax. The difference is Leica still has some taste, while Hasselblad has embraced kitsch bling for its repackaging atrocities.

IQ came first - that was the no compromise issue.Size, weight, (cost?) secondary within reason.Today's best performing lenses are highly telecentric and thus are much longer in physical length than their film-lens ancestors and have much more complex optical designs.

I doubt I'd ever own one of these lenses - I hope that uncompromised IQ includes: - Very good sharpness across the frame (into the extreme corners) wide open - Excellent sharpness across the frame stopped down just a bit before diffraction starts kicking in - APO-like performance - Very good bokeh - Very low residual spherical aberrations wide open so that it can used to shoot stars with fast shutter speeds/low ISO

As a landscape lens the weight is an issue for me unless I'm not far from home. It also appears to be pretty large so it takes up a lot of space either in the bag or while mounted on the camera thus limiting it's appeal in some circumstances.

they are unlike Leica compromising it in size and bulk.if they want to be like Leica , they have to make it as good as it is but smaller and lighter, other wise , it won't be any good for people who choose Leica.

Actually Leica does not have telecentric issues with its 50mm primes. The current summilux uses a similar double gaussian structure as Canon's 50mm primes. The size is partly due to the short flange range of the m mount, but also partly due to Leica being absolutely paranoid about not clogging up the RF window too much.

maybe you do not want to fork out this much for a MF lens , but if you know how feaking SHARP it is , you may change your opinion.and, it is relatively cheap considering how sharp and well made it is.it is nothing like Nikon Canon Sony junk.I just hope they can make it smaller even if it becomes a bit more expensive than it is.if you do not understand why people buy Zeiss or Leica without AF , you might need to try one of Zeiss zF or ZE line lenses such as Zeiss 21 mm f2.8, Zeiss 25mm f2 , Zeiss 50mm f2 , Zeiss 100mmf2 or even better the new 135mm f2 APO(the best Zeiss AF line to date).

Eh... Zeiss produces top quality optical glass, that their photography department, for instance, then assemble in lenses, with almost no distortion, nor chromatic aberration, and most of the time with nothing-short-of-stunning results in sharpness, into well built, easy to operate manual focus lenses... I don't think you can reduce zeiss or leica to just taking a tax on lenses made for Japanese manufacturer... It's a bit much.And no they did not develop an AF system, for the simple reason that it is expensive, requires to make compromises in size or optical design and that anyway AF can never be as accurate as MF and people who buy these lenses use them for applications in which detail and thus proper technique play a preponderant role...So sure, not everyone will enjoy it, and I see very few reasons why I personally would shoot Zeiss not being (good enough?) obsessed with detail and technique, and sure it's not the lens for casual snaps, but hey, it definitely has a market.

Seems to me that these new zeiss lenses are aimed at the medium format crowd. Instead of getting a Leica S and 70mm f2.5, you can get a Nikon D800 and 55mm f1.4 (both for less money than the 70mm S lens and much less than the S camera). Should have similar DOF and similar resolution. Looks like they're ultimately designed for studio work.

I trust what you say but I have too many 50mm something lenses and standard 50/1.4 ones (D and EF) work great and an MF lens with better image quality may not give me better shots at the end of the day.

It's always good to show you can do this sort of thing, like concept cars at the auto show. Whether existing 50mm lenses are not good enough I'm not so sure. Great news for Digilloyd and and Lens Rentals.

So they polled photographers who are looking for a portrait lens that will resolve the pores of their subjects?

A lens this theoretically sharp makes far more sense as a macro, not as a portrait lens. However, if I was to use a 55 for landscape (I use 24 which is plenty wide even though I have a 14mm prime), this will certainly take advantage of the D800 36MP. Those who think landscape with a 55 is not beneficial will find that using a 55 will mean the subject is framed tighter and less concern about foreground elements, this means the apertures won't be stopped down below the diffraction limits of the D800 dense sensor.

It's actually pretty clever of Zeiss to do it this way. The sharpest lens for landscape for sure and no one will complain because they won't be trying to go for the deepest depth of field with this field of view.

It's only we Anglo/Americans who use the dot. The rest of the world, being sensibly metric, uses the comma. And also uses spaces instead of commas to divide groups of three digits, e.g.: 365 365 365,653. In case you're interested.

No compromise?1. Size (actually I prefer large-but others may not)2. Weight (and heavy-but others may not)3. Price (I prefer cheap-othera may not)4. Made in Japan vs. made at home in Germany (I don't care-but others may)5. no AF (I love AF, but I also love a smooth MF)6. colour (I like white, doesn't heat up while doing landscapes in hot California or FL)7. no IS (no go for me).

I see a lot of compromise. Maybe they ought to have said no compromise in optical design. Now I have to wonder.....

in fact the best landscape lenses for the D800E is 50mm f2 MP or 85mm f1.4 G lens.you just need a lot of time to do stitching in Photoshop CC, but they are optically much better than any boring super wide so-called landscape lens such as 21mm f2.8, 14-24mm f2.8G or 18mmf3.5and , you do not have to shoot wide.so in real life this lens will be a great landscape lens for the D800E if not the best.

You are absolutely right. With photo stitching capability nowadays, there is less need to shoot with wide angle lens unless there are a lot of moving subjects.

50mm is an appropriate focal length to use for photo stitching as there is very little distortion of the image. Wide lenses tend to exagerate the foreground while telephoto lenses tend to compress the image.

There is no limit as to how wide you want the photo to cover. One can even do 360 degree photography or virtual photography with a 50mm lens.

Every lens is potentially a landscape lens but I sill prefer modest WAs. It just depends how you see the world, what you want to capture and what you have with you. Stitching has also come incredibly far (though there are still issues with subject movement) but some of us prefer to spend more time out there and behind a camera than on a computer doing PP. Each to his own.

I'm take a wild guess. This lens will cost about the same, if not more than the Leica APO 50/2 M. It's aim the luxury market where owners could sleep better at night knowing they have the bragging rights on certain things. :)

Wrong. It's market will be pros and enthusiastic photographers who need the ultimate image quality from combining a top quality lens with top quality sensors available today, in 35mm format. Simple. If you don´t have enough money, or do not need it, move on, there are other good lenses around.

I must agree with biza43. Zeiss have their standards. They make lenses to professional quality not to a price to please consumers with a budget.

It is good to have at least one optical company not making a lens to a "consumer pleasing price". Superior products, like gourmet food, are usually made in small quantity. Due to the lack of enonomy of scale, it will always be more expensive.

Similarly, cinematic lenses are very expensive. They are made to professional standards for the movie industry not the average consumer home videographer. The layman can forget about them but it is fine.

Does ZEISS make lenses to fit most brands of cameras?? I would love to see a discussion of lens manufacturers, and lens quality of various name brand lenses. I'm a rather serious enthusiast, and really don't claim to be well informed. I would like to read opinions of these more advanced and more opinionated lens buyers/users. Ramone.

Yes, they make them for Canon, Nikon, Sony, and M (Leica, etc) mounts. Rumors that they are planning for Fuji X-mount also.

On the "quality" of manufacturers, it seriously is a price = performance. A lot of people say Nikon this, Canon that, but in the end at least from my experience (over 3 decades) is the "color" of the manufacturer. Canon consistently gives warmer tones (redish) and Nikon is more neutral, while Zeiss is cooler (blueish, higher contrast) Although with Digital age that seems to be less of an issue. etc etc

Zeiss makes lenses for almost any mount you can think of. The Sony AF line, ZE, ZF.2, ZM are currently available, but Zk for Pentax has been discontinued. My experience with them have been very positive, they tend to maintain color consistency across systems, which is more than most other lens makers - even Leica can say.

"It was decided to focus on portraits, landscapes and still lifes". Personally I'll be interested to see the landscape lens(es). I'm assuming that they'd have to be looking at a couple of FLs (say 24mm & 35mm at the very least). And I sincerely hope that they're going to make them significantly smaller and lighter than this one. Zeiss need to understand that size and weight can be a compromise too. Serious landscapers will want lighter kit if they've got to carry them and all the hiking gear on a two week trek.......

I don't care too much for AF, and have no interest in the other lenses.

For landscapes, they have a 18mm, 21mm, and 25mm lenses for several digital mounts. But in this area, for example Canon already has two really good prime lenses, both tilt and shift:17 and 24mm.Personally, I use the Zeiss 25 f/2 on my Canon 6D, and I am really happy with the quality.

I know the existing line of excellent Zeiss lenses - they've been available for years. Given all the "no compromise" hype in their new blog, I've read this to mean that this is the first of a new line of Zeiss lenses, perhaps analogous to Sigma's new "Art" line. Maybe I'm wrong in that, and the lenses you refer to are indeed the landscape lenses. (A 55mm lens can also be used for landscape of course but if I was going to carry this one, I may as well carry a 4X5").

Not exactly. Zeiss says explicitly that the design target was a lens resolution good enough for a 36 MP sensor:

"In 2012, the Nikon D800 came on the market, equipped with a full-frame sensor with 36 megapixels. This was the highest resolution of any sensor in a full-frame camera to date. ZEISS wanted to offer photographers a range of high-end SLR lenses that would enable them to use the full potential of such cameras. Such a combination would achieve performance values that would be comparable to those of medium-format systems."

Bottom line: the performance of the new 55mm Zeiss lens is matched to the D800 sensor, it could even fit the future cameras, but the performance will be insufficient for use with sensors with resolution much higher than 36 MP.

The design brief was to produce a lens that would enable full resolution of 36MP sensors, not to specifically design for 36MP at the expense of higher resolutions. Designing a lens for a 100MP sensor would also "enable them to use the full potential of such [36MP] cameras"

In any case system MTF is the product of lens MTF and sensor MTF, improving either will improve system MTF

Sure, when the 100 MP come about, you will probably be able to mount this Zeiss lens on a Nikon or Canon camera. However, that will be like putting regular gas in a race car! Possible, but not an ideal combination. Consider too that, in a few years from now, Canon and Nikon will have redesigned their lenses lineup to match the performance of the upcoming new sensors, so these MF, non-IS Zeiss lenses will appear even more cumbersome then they are.

Since long ago, Canon and Nikon have the expertise to design small, light and affordable autofocus high-performance lenses. In contrast, Zeiss appears to be still in the XIX century: the auto-nothing Zeiss lenses are heavy and large, use a lot of glass and metal and few aspherical surfaces.

Zeiss uses a traditional approach to design lenses in a world that demands increasingly better optical performance. With Zeiss approach, better performance can only be achieved with more glasses in a complex design. No surprise that each new incarnation of a Zeiss lens is heavier than the previous. I hope that is clear now why I said before that if this 55mm F/1.4 lens is a "monster" (DPR word), I can only imagine the weight and size of the future Zeiss lens good for the future 100 MP cameras!

The 100/2.8 macro c/y zeiss belong to the top zeiss lenses ever. maybe you had a used one which didnt yet see service. i have bought a used 60/2.8 1:1. It was only years later, when i first used it that i recognized the blades needed cleaning. In an interview of two zeiss managers(one was dr. hubert nasse) in a german photo magazine i have read that until recently they were not allowed to get the best out of the lenses. and that the new HQ will be at the level of MF photography.How can we use that lens on nikon, canon SLRs without aperture ring?

Very curious to see how this lens performs. What irritates me is that they chose to make a 50mm first. I don't see a lack of great 50mm lenses for FX, if there would only be a great lens between 20 and 24mm.

If there is a reason to get this lens instead of a very good (and very cheap, if you look around) 50mm f1.4 AIS Nikkor manual focus lens (and a KatzEye focusing screen), it is not apparent -- and there would be enough money left over for a 180mm f2.8 Nikkor.